Femme Fatale: Sexy Women Sway Men to Do Bad Things

Men are less moral after exposure to images of sexy women, research finds.

The femme fatale is a stock character of classic film noir and hard-boiled detective stories — the seductive, fast-talking dame who lures a man into a trap of his own making. By the end of the tale, the man usually finds himself guilty of some hitherto undreamed-of crime, and wondering how he was ever convinced to stray from the path of moral rectitude.

Of course, the audience is never in any doubt as to what transpired: The poor sap had sex on the brain. Confronted with the femme fatale, our hero never stood a chance.

This is all well and good as far as fiction goes, but does a femme fatale hold as much sway in the real world? Can a good guy be turned bad by a sexy dame?

This is a question that occurred to Wen-Bin Chiou, a psychologist at National Sun Yat-sen University in Taiwan. To find out, Chiou brought 74 heterosexual men to the laboratory. The volunteers were first shown photographs of women, which they were asked to rate for sex appeal. Half of the volunteers, selected at random, saw women who had previously been rated as sexy; the other half saw women who had been rated low for sexiness.

Afterward, the men took part in what they were led to believe was an unrelated task. Once they had completed this task, they were each given an envelope containing a reward for participating. The men all expected to receive 120 Taiwanese dollars (about $4). However, an extra $50 coin had been slipped into their envelopes. Would the men return the excess cash?

Well, that depended on which photos the men had been shown: Of the men who had been shown the non-sexy photos, 78 percent returned the coin. But only 54 percent of the men who saw the sexy photos were as honest.

In a second study, Chiou showed another 90 men the same photos. Afterward, the men were given a series of mathematical puzzles to solve. For each puzzle they were able to solve in five minutes, the men were promised $20. After the five minutes had elapsed, the men were asked to count how many puzzles they had solved, and to take their payment from an envelope on their desk. And you guessed it: The men who had ogled the sexy women were more likely to collect more than their fair share. Of all the men who saw the sexy women, 60 percent took a bigger reward than they deserved; of the men who had been shown less sexy women, only 33 percent pilfered extra cash. Men in the low sex-appeal group took an average of $24 more than they should. Men in the high sex-appeal group took $62 more than their due.

Other studies by Chiou show that the effect of seeing sexy women on men’s dishonesty is mediated by self-control: Sexy women cause men to lose self-control, with the result that the men are less able to resist the urge to stuff unearned cash into their pockets. And other research shows that women are not susceptible to the effect: Showing straight women pictures of buff men does not diminish their willpower.

So it seems that Hollywood was right all along. (Did we ever doubt it?) A femme fatale really can make a man abandon his moral compass. But why?

Chiou thinks that the sexy images make men think about sex and the quickest way to get it. A man can’t instantly improve his physical appearance to attract a partner. But women are not just attracted to handsome men: Research has shown over and over again that they also value a man with resources. And acting dishonestly is the easiest way for a man to lay his hands on extra funds. Chiou says:

"Given that dishonesty can serve as a low-cost and convenient shortcut to acquire resources, power, status, and reputation, men with a heightened mating motive may engage in dishonest behaviors to display preferred characteristics to women in order to promote mate attraction."

Because women are less motivated than men to pursue short-term relationships, and because men are not especially attracted to women with surplus resources, we wouldn’t expect that encountering sexy men would make women more dishonest. This may be why the "homme fatale" is no Hollywood staple…

Hot women make men want to do very bad things. It activates a very old part of the brain. They should do a fMRI study. Best quote: "A blonde to make a bishop kick a hole in a stained glass window" - Raymond Chandler.

Thanks for your comment. Alternative advice might be for men to learn how their behaviour is influenced by external stimuli and, assuming they would rather not cheat or steal, to make extra efforts not to do so. The findings of this research do not imply that any possible solution is better than the other. We are all free to come to our own conclusions.

A few years ago, there was a youtube video making the rounds in which a very attractive lady (actress) would openly flirt with a guy right in front of his girlfriend. It almost always ended up the same: the guy was first shocked the girl out of his league was flirting with him, then hesitated as he internally struggled between the bird in the hand/bush, then brush his current GF away to take up with the new hottie. Only to have the hottie then immediately say she wasn't interested. The guy then either sat in disbelief or ran after his gf to try to patch things up. Of course, we only saw the episodes of when the guy chose the hottie, but to me it was very insightful of how men can almost instantly be conned into throwing it all away on the hopes for the bigger better deal of potential sex with someone hot.

It should be noted that "sexy women sway men to do bad things" is not an appropriate description of this research, because it implies that the women have agency in the matter. This is also why people are reacting negatively to the original title of this article (as cited here "Sexy women can tempt men down the road of immorality"). As if it's the woman's fault?

The sexy woman in this design is merely existing. She is not doing anything. In fact, in this instance, she is a photograph. What happened here is all on the male participants, not the women.

Presumably in response to backlash, the title of the journal article has now been changed to better reflect the findings:
"Self-control, generosity and honesty depend on exposure to pictures of the opposite sex in men but not in women."

"Exposure to pictures of the opposite sex" is much more appropriate here than "sexy women can tempt men." And I know that Psychology Today likes clicks, but I think it would be more responsible to have written this post with that framing in mind rather than one that is misogynistic and places the blame of male indiscretions on women.

It's a fair point. To be frank, I assume that most readers are aware that headlines are written to be eye-catching and are able to read through the story and make their own judgements if they so please. Would I choose a headline that was blatantly sexist? I would like to think I wouldn't. But I think sensible people can and will disagree on how provocative a headline can be before it goes too far. A very bland headline isn't doing its job. As long as the headline isn't misleading, which in this case I do not think it is, then I am OK with it. Having said that, editors at PT often alter headlines and if they have a better headline then I don't mind too much if it's changed.

To me, it is more important to write a balanced article that doesn't ascribe blame to anyone in particular. I think some commenters are hasty to conclude that I think the phenomenon described in this study is women's fault. I don't. It isn't really anyone's fault. Of course, men who accept this finding should probably feel obliged to introspect about their own behaviour.

I totally get what you're saying about headlines and I think that in today's clickbait world this phenomenon has only gotten increasingly worse and eye-roll-inducing. But you have to compete, right? Also, there are other insidious trends regarding squishing out free speech in favor of protecting everyone's feelings. I understand and that's definitely not my intention.

But I think it is worth pointing out -isms when they're there. We readers do understand that it is a clickbait headline. But the REASON it is clickbait is BECAUSE of sexism inherent in society. So to choose this title and this overall framing is to rely on that existing societal structure to get more attention. Maybe that's not so bad, but authors should be aware when they're doing it.

I'm not surprised by the comments. People who harbor sexist views will love the opportunity to see research that "justifies" these views and will say anything when making an anonymous comment. As for the burka comment it was probably written sarcastically as an acknowledgement of this situation in society, e.g. that women and girls are given restrictions on what to wear or do because without said restrictions, men and boys might do bad things, supposedly. While meanwhile, men and boys are not told much of anything by way of advice in the matter. (e.g. women are told not to drink when going to college parties so they can avoid being raped/assaulted; men are rarely given the same advice, even though being sober would reduce their likelihood of assaulting someone and increase their ability to notice and intervene if it was happening to someone.)

Again, I think it's a matter of what kind of author or publication you want to be when you make these kinds of decisions. Any given instance is truly no big deal, including this one. But seeing little things like this all over the place is a reminder that these -isms are pretty ingrained and probably aren't going anywhere unless people decide to be mindful of their words and actions.

I take your point. Actually, I just noticed that the title of this piece is currently "Sexy Women Sway Men to do Bad Things", which I think is slightly different to what I originally called it so it may have been changed by an editor. On my personal blog, I used "make" instead of "sway". This may seem basically the same, but for me 'sway' feels more active than 'make' and, since the photo isn't actively doing anything, I don't think I would choose 'sway'.

Do I think the headline is sexist clickbait, though? I've reflected on this and I don't really. Firstly, I think there is a difference between clickbait and a striking headline that makes people interested in learning more. I am not a journalist but I do try my best to avoid horrible Buzzfeed-style headlines. And is the concept of women who control men's behaviour to make them do bad things sexist? It could well be. This is why I chose to illustrate it by referencing the femme fatale of Hollywood movies, which is clearly a stock character from a bygone age and not something I expect readers to take seriously.

Anyway, all this to say that the points you make are things that I consider as I write my headlines and articles, but I think you and I draw the line in a slightly different place.

I don't think that "make" is less sexist than "sway"; it could actually be worse because "make" is more successful and forcible than "sway." Either way, the wording is that the woman is DOING something. So as per your earlier comment that you didn't think your title was misleading, I disagree. In the research, the woman was a photograph. She was not doing. Only the male participant is doing something. If the title were "Sexy women make men do bad things," this implies that sexy women, perhaps as opposed to non-sexy women, are more manipulative or malicious people. How about, "Men are more prone to cheat and lie when exposed to pictures of sexy women." Or even "...when exposed to sexy women" is better. The agency is back on the man, not the woman. It's still click-worthy, because it's about cheating and lying and sexy women.

I do like the femme fatale component of your piece because it is reminding us that this phenomenon has been explored in film / the arts. I wouldn't say it's so "bygone" or not something to be taken seriously, though. Society as a whole holds this view to be evident -- women, especially sexy ones, are evil temptresses who CAUSE bad behavior in men. You see this in the most ancient texts of all (Adam and Eve!) as well as present-day narratives.

So in that sense, this was a great topic to report on, because here we have some research backing up this very common narrative. I just find it irresponsible for the authors of that research (with their original title) and the reporters on this research to latch onto the familiar stereotype rather than choosing to challenge the way it's framed. I appreciate the evolutionary perspectives on the issue with regard to money/income but another way to think of this is to ask whether the chicken or the egg came first. If you're entrenched in a sexist society in which women are not hired and given appropriate pay, then perhaps it's your subconscious views that cause these effects in the first place (i.e. if you are in an egalitarian society then men and women alike would be less likely to have the "man as provider" mentality, and the effects could disappear). Perhaps this is a topic for further cross-cultural exploration.

Thank you Katherine. I completely agree with you on all you have said!
Your comments are the best comments I have read in a long time. They are true and honest in all ways, and as a woman, i agree completely